Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1826 (RAJ)

Khem Chand Sharma v. Food Corporation of India

2018-09-04

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

body2018
ORDER : 1. The petitioner alongwith one other co-delinquent K.B. Agarwal were punished vide order dated 6.9.2011 with a penalty of recovery of Rs. 59,051/- from each of them in relation to the loss caused to the FCI on account of wrongful payment transferred in the account of Mandi VAT. 2. It appears that K.B. Agarwal filed an appeal against the said order and the appellate authority taking note of the fact that the excess payment transferred, has been refunded back to the FCI, modified the order dated 6.9.2011 and directed to refund the amount to Mr. K.B. Agarwal imposed by way of penalty. The respondents thereafter refunded the penalty amount so far as Mr. K.B. Agarwal is concerned. However, so far as the petitioner is concerned, they have denied refund on the ground that the petitioner had not preferred an appeal against the order of imposing of penalty. 3. The petitioner thus approached this Court praying for quashing of order dated 6.9.2011 so far as it relates to the petitioner and also prays for refund of the amount recovered from his salary by way of penalty since the entire amount had been refunded back to FCI which had been transferred in another account due to error. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the writ petition by stating that the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal before the appellate authority. 5. Having noted the aforesaid submissions, I find that the case of the petitioner cannot be distinguished to that of Mr. K.B. Agarwal. Once the appellate authority holds that the penalty was not required to be imposed, even if the petitioner has not preferred an appeal, since the power is available with the authorities to review their own orders, the respondents ought to have refunded the penalty amount to the petitioner too, more so when the entire amount which was erroneously transferred in another account has been refunded back to FCI. 6. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. The order of imposing of penalty dated 6.9.2011 stands modified as per the order passed in favour of co-delinquent Mr. K.B. Agarwal by the FCI dated 17.3.2017 and the respondents are directed to refund the penalty amount recovered from petitioner’s salary within a period of two months hereinafter. 7. No costs.